Mccartney vs Sting?

[CelinderMotoMan]

They are both great and inspiring. Ever try and play and sing "St. Augustine in Hell", Heavy Clouds, No Rain" or "Seven Days" from Ten Summoners Tales or "25 til Midnight".

Paul has wrote some clever lines as well, "Something", "My Love", "Silly Love Songs" are all very clever pop songs.

 

[xlows]

i would say sting, just becouse i like his bass lines a lot more, Paul mcartneys are pretty boring to me

Ever listen to Something? I dare you to play that one perfectly. It's a toughy.

 

[xlows]

I hearby challange you to play "Something", sir. No tabs, now, use those ears.

bwahaha! I was beaten to it.

 

[PilbaraBass]

sting's the more proficient musician...

paul is a more accomplished song writer...


both are excellent at both...so I'm putting my money on the undertaker....that's right...whoever dies first claims immortality first...and hence is the better bass player....

 

[borja]

both are great musicians.., and I love the fact we are discussin about them. I think everybody should include some of their bass lines in their formation as bass players. If somebody think Paul McCartney is not such a great bass player I recommend try to learn "All My Loving", "Ob-la.di, ob-la-da", "Penny Lane" or "Day Tripper". For the other hand, I love Sting bass lines on "Roxanne", "Message in a bottle", "So Lonely" and "Bring on the Night".

 

[corinpills]

I think Sting deserves a lot of credit for inspiring bass players of my generation (I'm 39... very, very old and creaky). When I was first developing my ear, I wore out 3 copies of Zenyatta Mondatta and his parts were simple in that they were often in box shapes that a 14 year old could grasp, but of course their rhythmic placement was anything but predictable. I think a lot of players my age have that rhythmic displacement as an early influence.

Also, it was pretty hip to know Police tunes and it balanced out all the Rush bass lines we were learning at the time. It showed the value of simplicity in a way that has been very profound in my playing.

I still want to punch him in the neck for his pretentiousness, but he was a major influence on a young pimply me.

 

[asahobby]

They both make more loon than me so they are doing something right.Mac is one of the old masters he is to pop music what brahms and bach were to classical music,but that is my opinion.

 

[Chili]

Ever listen to Something? I dare you to play that one perfectly. It's a toughy.

dont get me wrong, i respect paul mcartney and the beatles, i've heard loads of beatles songs, when i was in year 6 primary school, my teacher would have us sing along to the beatles n stuff instead of hymns etc lol, but just to me pauls playing doesnt do as much or me as stings playing with the police, i've got nothing against paul or anything

 

[CelinderMotoMan]

I can't believe that people are only sighting Stings Police stuff and Pauls Bealtes stuff and not their solo carrers, which musically surpass the early stuff. Believe it or not, each have continued to grow as players and writers, even without their bands.

 

[Alvaro Martín Gómez A.]

I can't believe that people are only sighting Stings Police stuff and Pauls Bealtes stuff and not their solo carrers, which musically surpass the early stuff. Believe it or not, each have continued to grow as players and writers, even without their bands.

Hmm... I respectfully disagree with your statement. To me, the only improvement in their post Beatles/Police music is that they've had big names in their studio sessions at their disposal, and that resulted in more "polished" or "slick" productions (as George Harrison said once: "Having played with other musicians, I don't even think the Beatles were that good"). But that doesn't mean that their creations are necessarily "better". I find Sting's solo stuff extremely boring, and I only recall a handful of McCartney songs that I really like. I remember when "Pipes Of Piece" was released with so much hype (at least where I live) and frankly, never got what was so great about it (obviously, Michael Jackson's appearance in the album had very much to do with that). The Beatles + George Martin were simply meant to be and none of them as individuals could surpass their collective accomplishments (being Lennon the one who got closer).

In my opinion, of course.

 

[CelinderMotoMan]

Hmm... I respectfully disagree with your statement. To me, the only improvement in their post Beatles/Police music is that they've had big names in their studio sessions at their disposal, and that resulted in more "polished" or "slick" productions (as George Harrison said once: "Having played with other musicians, I don't even think the Beatles were that good"). But that doesn't mean that their creations are necessarily "better". I find Sting's solo stuff extremely boring, and I only recall a handful of McCartney songs that I really like. I remember when "Pipes Of Piece" was released with so much hype (at least where I live) and frankly, never got what was so great about it (obviously, Michael Jackson's appearance in the album had very much to do with that). The Beatles + George Martin were simply meant to be and none of them as individuals could surpass their collective accomplishments (being Lennon the one who got closer).

In my opinion, of course.

I guess you are right, neither player has progressed since the 70's, 37 additional years on their instrument has done nothing for them as writers or players.

 

[butchblack]

I once read where Sting called Sir Paul "The Guv'nor". That pretty much tells you right there.

If you think Paul's lines are boring, try playing and singing "I Saw Her Standing There". Or try the bassline from "Come Together" or "I Want You (She's So Heavy)". You might gain a new respect!

One other thing to consider is the time frame. The bass lines in a lot of the Beatles songs were revolutionary (pun intended) for that time period.

I do agree that it's somewhat comparing apples to oranges as their musical styles are so different, McCartney is definitely pop and Sting has a strong jazz influence, even in the Police.

I think dwbass said it best : "I would rate them equal. Both wrote great songs! Both sing well. Both play other instruments well. I give Paul the edge in the money/assets dept. Sting does have a more progressive (sorta jazzy) approach to writing. He also doubles on upright. Paul is pure 'pop'. I like them both."

 

[kevbassman]

McCartney hands down. Love or hate the Beatles...they were the first to use feeback, write & perform their own tones, record bass DI in the board & mic the amp.
Both Sting & McCartney are great players & singers....but McCartney by far. How many bands change key's 1-2 steps down live? McCartney changes nothing & is still belting it out.

 

[Delberthot]

I agree that Sting's '55 precision would destroy Macca's cheap German Gibson knock-off.

I would have to say that I like some of Paul's stuff and I like some of Sting's.

I vote for apples - oranges are just overrated, rough peaches with horrible stones

 

[LarryR]

I have to add my 2 cents here.
First, I agree 100%....what's the point of a versus thread? "Talking about music is like dancing about Architecture".

Still, if you've studied McCartney (and I mean studied every inch of nuance in say, 80% of the 216 songs the Beatles recorded in their brief 7 years) - In other words, if you have BIG EARS, you'd have to rename this thread "McCartney or Jamerson" - who by the way are my favorite top 2 nuanced players. Naturally I love a zillion other guys, but these 2 rise to the top - in the world of Pop music.
So, (for my comments here) that leaves out Jaco, Stanley, Wooten, Squire et al..

Sting, pretty boy that he is, and damned good writer, singer, musician, doesn't hold a candle to these guys, nor would he profess to. Some guys (IN Pop) that come to mind are Trevor Bolder or Bruce Thomas. They also have the gift of naturally nuancing all sections Verse-Chorus-Bridge-Out of a 3 minute pop tune.

McCartney stands at the top of heap when it comes to "most interesting notes" bar-to-bar in a 3 minute pop song. There's really too many examples to mention. One thing you'll notice about Jamerson and McCartney, they are basically jamming all the way through. They're not just playing the changes, they're living, breathing the changes. I'm sure there are other players who do the same so forgive me for not mentioning them.

Still, it's one thing to play through a song very well, hitting all the important downbeats, sections etc., it's another to naturally open up a 3D approach where nuance (sorry to overuse the word) is part of your playing. When nuance doesn't sound cliche or out of place, that's about as genius as you can get - and I rarely ever use that word.

I'll now step down of my pulpit....and practice....and listen....and practice more.

 

[MammaryVest]

I think Sting fits in with those guys just fine.

 

[Bob Moulton]

I have to add my 2 cents here.
First, I agree 100%....what's the point of a versus thread? "Talking about music is like dancing about Architecture".

Still, if you've studied McCartney (and I mean studied every inch of nuance in say, 80% of the 216 songs the Beatles recorded in their brief 7 years) - In other words, if you have BIG EARS, you'd have to rename this thread "McCartney or Jamerson" - who by the way are my favorite top 2 nuanced players. Naturally I love a zillion other guys, but these 2 rise to the top - in the world of Pop music.
So, (for my comments here) that leaves out Jaco, Stanley, Wooten, Squire et al..

Sting, pretty boy that he is, and damned good writer, singer, musician, doesn't hold a candle to these guys, nor would he profess to. Some guys (IN Pop) that come to mind are Trevor Bolder or Bruce Thomas. They also have the gift of naturally nuancing all sections Verse-Chorus-Bridge-Out of a 3 minute pop tune.

McCartney stands at the top of heap when it comes to "most interesting notes" bar-to-bar in a 3 minute pop song. There's really too many examples to mention. One thing you'll notice about Jamerson and McCartney, they are basically jamming all the way through. They're not just playing the changes, they're living, breathing the changes. I'm sure there are other players who do the same so forgive me for not mentioning them.

Still, it's one thing to play through a song very well, hitting all the important downbeats, sections etc., it's another to naturally open up a 3D approach where nuance (sorry to overuse the word) is part of your playing. When nuance doesn't sound cliche or out of place, that's about as genius as you can get - and I rarely ever use that word.

I'll now step down of my pulpit....and practice....and listen....and practice more.

+1! Preaching to the choir. I really like Sting too and I am a huge Police fan, but McCartney is on a whole different level. I really think McCartney doesn't get his due as a bass player because so many people (especially males) were and continue to be put off by the legion screaming females. If you put away your biases and just look at the facts, McCartney hands down.

 

[Brad Johnson]

I dunno. Everytime I try to figure out a Police bass line, the simplicity strikes me.

Paul whips out some pleasingly innovative stuff like Something, Silly Love Songs (he sings this one too), I Want You etc. etc.

And IMO the simple lines are some of the most difficult to write.



I like both of them. I find it amusing that some are unaware of Sting's success as a musician.

 

[Brad Johnson]

What a lame thread. Since when was playing bass a competitive sport?

You're new here, eh?

 

[Brad Johnson]

I have to add my 2 cents here.
First, I agree 100%....what's the point of a versus thread? "Talking about music is like dancing about Architecture".

Still, if you've studied McCartney (and I mean studied every inch of nuance in say, 80% of the 216 songs the Beatles recorded in their brief 7 years) - In other words, if you have BIG EARS, you'd have to rename this thread "McCartney or Jamerson" - who by the way are my favorite top 2 nuanced players. Naturally I love a zillion other guys, but these 2 rise to the top - in the world of Pop music.
So, (for my comments here) that leaves out Jaco, Stanley, Wooten, Squire et al..

Sting, pretty boy that he is, and damned good writer, singer, musician, doesn't hold a candle to these guys, nor would he profess to. Some guys (IN Pop) that come to mind are Trevor Bolder or Bruce Thomas. They also have the gift of naturally nuancing all sections Verse-Chorus-Bridge-Out of a 3 minute pop tune.

McCartney stands at the top of heap when it comes to "most interesting notes" bar-to-bar in a 3 minute pop song. There's really too many examples to mention. One thing you'll notice about Jamerson and McCartney, they are basically jamming all the way through. They're not just playing the changes, they're living, breathing the changes. I'm sure there are other players who do the same so forgive me for not mentioning them.

Still, it's one thing to play through a song very well, hitting all the important downbeats, sections etc., it's another to naturally open up a 3D approach where nuance (sorry to overuse the word) is part of your playing. When nuance doesn't sound cliche or out of place, that's about as genius as you can get - and I rarely ever use that word.

I'll now step down of my pulpit....and practice....and listen....and practice more.

In that lame thread, I'd pick Jamerson.